Talk:Elita-One (Movie)

Would it be too much for this wiki if we were to attempt to throw in a "town bicycle" joke in Elita's article here? --Terrocon Blot 21:52, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

• Probably not. Dead horses shouldn't be beaten. -- SFH 21:57, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Frequency

How does the use of this mold (six times now, not counting Japanese uses?) compare with the frequency of other molds? I can think of a few G1 molds that beat it, and the Spychangers. What else?--G.B. Blackrock 20:40, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Can it beat the Seekers? -- SFH 20:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Almost certainly not (I did mention G1 stuff already). Let's see. Six within G1 alone. Add Sunstorm (although if we DO add Japanese uses, cataloging becomes even more complicated. Not that this means we shouldn't). Do reissues count? But in any event, I certainly agree that the Seekers beat out this mold, at least for now. ;) --G.B. Blackrock 20:47, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Mold's certainly showing some wear though. Particularly in the energon weapon. Not that I'm complaining, as I'm still building my little Charlie's Angels-esque fembot elite group.--Rosicrucian 20:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

As I noted in the "summary" comment when I posted that first bit, this does seem to be the default "female robot" mold of our era.--G.B. Blackrock 21:01, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Hyphen

For those who own the toy: does the packaging include the hyphen in the name? Interrobang 06:23, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Another Elita...

Would it be worth mentioning in the toy section that the bike Elita Seven is shown to be riding in the Alternity fiction looks a lot like this version of the mould? --Nerroth 12:58, 2 March 2010 (EST)

Following posts transfered from Talk: Elita-1 (ROTF). --Khajidha 09:21, 24 February 2011 (EST)

"Purple motorcycle Autobot"

Is there any point to this article at all? We can glimpse three motorcycle robots chasing after Sideways in the trailers. We've already seen clear footage of the three cycles in vehicle forms with riders in a officially-released production video on Walmart's TF site. Clearly this character will have a toy and have a name, so all this article is doing is going to make a future useless redirect that nobody will use and we'll have to delete. And why is she a "comic-only character"? Palette swap? They clearly have different bodies in that image!

Here's a thought - if we don't know jack about a character yet but information is likely to appear someday, we don't bother creating the article. --FFN 19:01, 7 May 2009 (EDT)

But we do know something. She answered Prime's call, came to Earth, and was training with NEST. That's plenty for an article. But you are right, she is confirmed for the movie I forgot about that video.

I'm not sure she will get a name. I heard there will be many bots running around in the movie and some won't get name-checks. I'm not sure she will get a toy, either. - Starfield 19:21, 7 May 2009 (EDT)

Given she's an on-screen character, she'll get a toy. Hell, she's been seen more often than Jolt. They're staggering the release of the cycles, as it appears Chromia will be released before Arcee (whom we didn't know what she would look like until a couple of days ago), so there's still plenty of time for a [insert name] toy to be released. --FFN 19:41, 7 May 2009 (EDT)

Look at it this way: Either she gets a name or she doesn't. If she gets a name, we can move (and possibly expand) the article appropriately. If she doesn't, she still has enough of an appearance to merit the article as it is. What's the harm in setting this up and leaving it as-is for the next month or so?--Apcog 19:44, 7 May 2009 (EDT)

If she is unnamed in the movie (which I think is probable since her name hasn't been announced yet, but she might be named in an adaptation) and gets a toy in a later wave, she could go months without a name. - Starfield 19:57, 7 May 2009 (EDT)

I don't think that it matters that the character might get a name in the near future. There's enough information right now to warrant an article and the process of moving this page and deleting the redirect is not a difficult task to perform. Geewunling 02:37, 8 May 2009 (EDT)

I was annoyed at the fact Starfield presumed to declare she was a "comic only character" because he forgot about trailers and footage, and has now decided she be named and won't get a toy. The way I see it, all this article says is "We don't know anything, but we're doing an article anyway just so we could have an article on something we don't know about." --FFN 21:23, 8 May 2009 (EDT)

The article says, "Here's a character who looks like she might have some expansion on her background later. This is what little we know now." In that, it resembles a number of similar minimal articles on the wiki which, to my knowledge, have not incurred such dissension.--Apcog 00:04, 9 May 2009 (EDT)

Indeed. She's a character who has appeared in published fiction. That's enough. --ItsWalky 00:24, 9 May 2009 (EDT)

She does appear in the movie although not alot and she is refered to collectively as arcee, in essence its the same brain three bodies, I thought it would be crap but shes cool —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Connolly217 (talk • contribs){{#if:June 22 2009, 12:57 EDT| June 22 2009, 12:57 EDT|}}.

And we're no closer to a name.

Sadly, the movie adaptation identifies all three of these motorcycles as Arcee.--Rosicrucian^Talk 18:10, 23 May 2009 (EDT)

Does the novel clear things up any? The comic is... a little vague. It is the purple one, however, that positively identified herself as "Arcee". Is she like Reflector or what? - Starfield 18:54, 23 May 2009 (EDT)

Not having read either, I formed the opinion quite a while back that the movie probably would just treat the three bikes as a Reflectoresqy Arcee-hive-mind type thing, with the additional personalities and names just being a creation of the toyline. - Chris McFeely 18:58, 23 May 2009 (EDT)

Well, all three of them were speaking as one entity. Their sentences were split up amongst them.--Rosicrucian^Talk 19:04, 23 May 2009 (EDT)

In the Novel they are all three called "Arcee" and when one of them talks..it doesn't say which one, it jut says that Arcee talks..so it does indeed seem a bit like Reflecter...Chipmonk328

They're all called Arcee in the movie.Monty Prime 06:27, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

pretty sure it's moonracer.

Last we know, someone else owns the trademark to "Moonracer." (S'why we got Chromia in the BotCon 2005 set instead) The only way we're going to get a name for the bike is through Hasbro's name for the toy, so it's going to be a name that they can stake a claim to. --ItsWalky 17:50, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

Since they can't release a moonracer toy, or mention her by that name, we likely won't get it cleared up. The bikes are referred to as the Arcee "twins" to muck up the issue even more. It'd be like she didn't exist, just to avoid a lawsuit.~~

You're misinterpreting. Arcee and the Twins (Mudflap and Skids) were dispatched to go after Sideways.--Rosicrucian^Talk 11:23, 10 July 2009 (EDT)

We have a name. Huzzah!--Rosicrucian^Talk 18:08, 23 July 2009 (EDT)

What source says she is called Flareup or moonracer? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 92.238.160.11 (talk • contribs){{#if:14:11, 24 July 2009| 14:11, 24 July 2009|}}.

No source says she's "Moonracer" other than weirdos on the internet. "Flareup" however was confirmed at SDCC '09.--Rosicrucian^Talk 15:00, 24 July 2009 (EDT)

Delete?

Has her toy been officially announced? If not, perhaps this article should be deleted until it is. She doesn't exist on her own until the toy. - Starfield 23:12, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

I humbly disagree. We got a purple Autobot that changes into a motorcycle in the story. A lack of a toy isn't reason enough to delete the article. However, Hasbro's going to be hard-pressed to release a second redeco of the same toy for the ROTF line. We'll see. - Zadok Rox 23:18, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

Hasbro guys at the BotCon booth mentioned that the purple bike is coming. She might be a retool of Chromia? --ItsWalky 23:25, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

Second redeco? Arcee and Chromia are distinctly different toys. If the purple one reuses parts of one of those two, that would make her the FIRST redeco. - Cattleprod 23:57, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

Parsing

There is a current Transformers trademark application for Flare Up. It's possible that this is what the final parsing of the toy will end up as; on the other hand, the Hasbro lawyers applied for Oilslick instead of Oil Slick and Construction Devastator instead of Constructicon Devastator when doing those apps... most of the time, though, they're fairly on-target, so we may be moving this. --Monzo 11:03, 26 July 2009 (EDT)

Wonder why they tried to trademark "Construction Devastator". What we eventually got makes more sense. --FFN 14:15, 30 July 2009 (EDT)

Oh, come on!

[1] Whaaaaat. Onslaught Six 16:00, 25 August 2009 (EDT)

Whoops. Change the page name.

I hope they don't seriusly call her Elita-1 there.--Sunjumper 16:42, 25 August 2009 (EDT)

That contradicts what the guys said at SDCC... --Lonegamer78 20:13, 25 August 2009 (EDT)

Merge?

I'd say keep them separate at least until her bio is revealed. If they both claim to be the first Female or something then it would be obvious that they are same character. - Starfield 19:24, 25 August 2009 (EDT)

I agree, maybe it was just a mistake they made, we sould wait untill anything apears in fiction/on the toy before doing anything to this article now.--Sunjumper 13:28, 26 August 2009 (EDT)

Why do we take one announcement from Hasbro over what her name is over another? --67.149.197.71 20:04, 27 August 2009 (EDT)

"Elita-1" was announced later so we are assuming that their plans changed. - Starfield 20:22, 27 August 2009 (EDT)

I don't think I could accept that change, just due to the fact that in Reign of Starscream, Elita-1 gets strapped to the new All-Spark and sacrificed with a bunch of others... And seeing as how they can't resurrect Jazz, how the hell does Elita-1 come back? 68.147.249.146 03:05, 28 August 2009 (EDT)

She does not realy need to come back to life, it could be that it's just a "new" version. remember, there is a Jolt(movie) and Jolt(ROTF)/Jetfire(movie) and Jetfire(ROTF).--81.243.6.229 06:29, 28 August 2009 (EDT)(I'm sunjumper, but i can't log on on my work.)

YES. THAT IS WHAT THE DISCUSSION IS ABOUT. —Interrobang

Jesus Christ, Interrobang, do you need a time out? --ItsWalky 10:10, 30 August 2009 (EDT)

Thanks for yelling at me, i'm just stating something here. Just the idea that someone thinks of merging this with E1 from the first movie a realy odd because there are many other characters from the first movie with the same name who DON'T get merged.--Sunjumper 16:19, 28 August 2009 (EDT)

No merge, i think this is a diffrent character, aslo seeign that this elita is just part of arcee but the one of reign of stasrcrmea is just 1 robot i dont they should merge, so i dotn think this should merge cuz they diffrent transformers —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Eagc7 (talk • contribs){{#if:23:58, August 29, 2009 (EDT)| 23:58, August 29, 2009 (EDT)|}}.

Definitely no merge. I know I'm not 'in the club,' but... c'mon, it's obvious in all versions of the story. The comics' Elita-1 is ever so clearly her own character, and the movie's purple motorcycle is ever so clearly one third of the Reflector-esque Arcee, and treated as such in all adaptations. It's a coincidental name similarity (and one that does not actually exist within any fiction, or has that changed? But even if it *does,* I think we'd need more than the name - after all, we don't consider Blackout the Minicon, Blackout the Divebomb Terrorcon treated as an individual because Energon is weird, and Blackout the Bruticus arm to be the same guy, and that's because there's no evidence that they're supposed to be, and just no way they could be... as with this situation.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.245.138.109 (talk • contribs){{#if:15:21, November 2, 2009 (EST)| 15:21, November 2, 2009 (EST)|}}.

I'm kinda with on "no merge" and go with the Jetfire(ROTF) and Jetfire(movie) line we had. I mean, there's still Tales of the Fallen for Arcee... (which could make things even more messier, on that thought) --Lonegamer78 21:39, 2 November 2009 (EST)

The film version of this character is already covered on Arcee's page, so we are just talking about the toy for this page, which we don't know anything about. Her toy bio may or may not clear things up. Probably she is a different character since the other Elita-One died. Except "Elita-1" makes less sense than other names to be shared by two characters. "Elita-1" seems like a special name. How many "Elita-1s" can there be? The page for the original Elita One says her name sorta means "Chosen One". - Starfield 22:43, 2 November 2009 (EST)

No, I don't think the two should be merged. I mean, we have two G1 Barrages, two G1 Sky Highs, three Energon Blackouts, Movie and ROTF Jolt, Movie and ROTF Skids... there's no indication whether this Elita-One is the same with the one in the movie toyline. Blackjack 09:33, 2 December 2009 (EST)

Keep them separate unless they turn out to be the same character. ---Blackout- 09:41, 2 December 2009 (EST)

But there aren't multiple Ultra Magnuses, Rodimuses, Grimlocks, and Optimuses. "Elita-1" strikes me as one of those unique made-up-word names that is unlikely to go to multiple characters. But I could be wrong. - Starfield 10:00, 2 December 2009 (EST)

Beyond G1, Elita One's name doesn't hold that special meaning. "One" was designed as "title", like "Prime", but look at Animated for instance, in which a 'mere' trainee had "-1" in her name. I think G1 Elita's name is not an argument to say the two movie versions are the same character. Geewunling 12:37, 2 December 2009 (EST)

And really, we can't read the tea leaves to even that degree. It's gotten us in trouble before. Ergo, until shown otherwise, we have to assume that the Target exclusive was named and given a bio without much if any thought as to the character's future. Given the name game back and forth that's been played with the purple bike, I'm not willing to assume anything other than "trademark was available."--Rosicrucian^Talk 13:30, 2 December 2009 (EST)

So, reading her bio, there is nothing there to link this Elita to the Elita who spells out "One". *sigh* The movieverse continuity is irrevocably broken. - Starfield 17:13, 26 August 2010 (EDT)

In "Foundation," Elita says she has two younger sisters. In "Rising Storm," it retcons the "Tales of the Fallen" story about Arcee getting made into triplets to include resurrecting the dead Elita and some chick named Chromia. --ItsWalky 01:18, 24 February 2011 (EST)

Main pic

There's a scene that gives you a close up of Arcee's face, and a close up of Elita's. Why not just use that. It's when they're chasing Sideways User: Eire

Redeco of Chromia?

Is there an online link confirming the toy to be a redeco, or was it more a word-of-mouth thing at Toy Fair 2010? It'd be a shame, given that Elita-1 also has a unique robot mode. And I doubt there's going to be a HA Elita, so I guess this will be the best we get. Tarrn 04:08, 23 February 2010 (EST)

Check Seibertron.com's older news on Toy Fair 2010. Unfortunately, yes, Elita-1's going to be a redeco. Geewunling 07:54, 23 February 2010 (EST)

Instructions for combine Online only?

where and when hasbro sayed that the instructicosn for combine the sisters would be online only? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Eagc7 (talk • contribs){{#if:| {{{2}}}|}}.

May have been in the August Q&A answers for ActionFigs.com, but I can't access the answers because it's login required. --abates 20:55, 7 March 2010 (EST)

They said so at Toy Fair 2010. --ItsWalky 20:59, 7 March 2010 (EST)

well i was expecting a Link to the confirmation, cuz none seen to belive me when im saying them that the intructions are online only —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Eagc7 (talk • contribs){{#if:| {{{2}}}|}}.

You'll just have to have the delayed satisfaction of being right unless Hasbro completely flakes on uploading the instructions like they're bound to. --ItsWalky 19:47, 8 March 2010 (EST)

What you mean? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Eagc7 (talk • contribs){{#if:| {{{2}}}|}}.

You're not getting a link. --ItsWalky 23:45, 9 March 2010 (EST)

ok —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Eagc7 (talk • contribs){{#if:| {{{2}}}|}}.

...Why do you keep tagging your own posts as unsigned? --Detour 01:46, 11 March 2010 (EST)

Eh....i Dont know —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Eagc7 (talk • contribs){{#if:| {{{2}}}|}}.

End of transferred posts. --Khajidha 09:21, 24 February 2011 (EST)